The Supreme Court Thursday instructed the Centre that it should set itself a timeline to reply to suggestions made by the Collegium to refill vacancies in posts of judges.
It stated the federal government should let the Court know concerning the timeline on the subsequent date of listening to.
The authorities, in the meantime, assured the Court that it’s going to take a choice throughout the subsequent three months on ten names nonetheless pending with it after being really helpful by the Collegium for appointment as High Court judges.
The ten pending suggestions embody these for the High Courts of Calcutta, Delhi and Jammu and Kashmir.
“The response on the ten names, a decision will be taken within three months,” Attorney General Okay Okay Venugopal instructed the bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices S Okay Kaul and Surya Kant when he was requested “What is the position of Collegium recommendations pending with the Centre?”.
The bench recorded this in its order: “Mr K K Venugopal, learned Attorney General for India appearing for the Union of India, states that the Government will take a decision regarding ten names sent to it vide letters dated 25.07.2019, 17.10.2019 and 18.08.2020 which are pending from more than six months, within a period of three months and communicate the same to this Court accordingly.”
The CJI instructed Venugopal: “Mr Attorney General, I think this case can be brought to a conclusion if the Centre tells us the timeline which will be adhered to in each stage of judges’ appointment.”
The AG responded {that a} timeline needs to be mounted for the High Courts to make suggestions.
The bench pointed to the necessity for a timeline for the Centre in addition to the High Courts.
“We need to know the timeline by the Centre to respond to Supreme Court Collegium recommendations, and the other timeline is with respect to High Courts,” Justice Kaul stated. “Please intimate the timeline on the next date of hearing,” he instructed the AG – the order didn’t specify the following date of listening to.
The CJI stated: “We are not reviewing any appointments or judicial appointments. We just want to know the timeline in which the government and judiciary will proceed with respect to judges’ appointment.”
The situation of judicial vacancies got here up whereas the Supreme Court was listening to a petition associated to a strike by attorneys in Odisha.
Hearing the plea on March 25, the Supreme Court had flagged the query of 55 suggestions – 45 really helpful by High Court Collegiums and 10 cleared by the Supreme Court Collegium — pending with the federal government, and sought a press release from the Attorney General on their standing.
Following this, the Ministry of Law and Justice forwarded the 45 names obtained from High Courts – these had been pending with it for inputs from the Intelligence Bureau and background checks – to the Supreme Court Collegium which can now scrutinise and take a name on their suitability.
According to the Memorandum of Procedure for appointment of judges, the federal government has to do a background examine on the names obtained from the High Court after which ahead them to the Supreme Court.
